D&D 4E Social interactions in 4E

[Tharen the Damned]

So what's the reason to quantify these types of encounters with rules? As was said before, I've been doing it this way since I started playing (with AD&D). It simply doesn't need to be written into the rules. Waste of page space, really.

A good or a long-time DM can and likely will use a kind a houserule or freeform resolution for social encounters.
But there are many new DMs out there who might do better with a set of rules that they can use (but do not have to).

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Our favorite rodent of the dark's attitude has affected my impression of 4E positively: I've really enjoyed Ari's published work and think I'd love to sit around his game table, so if he's got some insider knowledge and is psyched that's a positive sign for me.

 

[Pale]

A good or a long-time DM can and likely will use a kind a houserule or freeform resolution for social encounters.
But there are many new DMs out there who might do better with a set of rules that they can use (but do not have to).

True. But it's certainly not my cup of tea. Perhaps I'm being cynical here, but I don't think that the kind of GM who would have trouble with such a thing will even bother to use those rules in the first place. I know that everything I did when I was 12 were hack-and-slash encounters... I didn't even want to bother with social interactions beyond "Do you feel lucky, punk?" until I was an experienced player/DM.

What's the reason to quantify anything with rules?

Because it's better than the "'I killed you!' 'Nuh-uh!' " mechanic found in the wonderful and simple game of "Cops and Robbers".

---------

It seems that they are trying to force a particular style of play through the gaming rules. Something that I've been against for a very long time. Certainly there are games that lend themselves to a particular style of play and you usually know what you're getting into when you start playing them.

My stance can be refined down to this: With the mechanic for 'conversational duels' in place it makes it that much harder to simply role-play the encounter without the dice rolls. It also makes it that much harder to get to the action if you feel like it by reducing it to a single die roll. It also reduces role-play of that sort into a number-crunching game for some players... the ones who take combat in that direction (something I highly dislike).

I can see where people will like this. My personal opinion is that a system like this is a waste of ink as a core rule.

All that said, I love Ari's work. I trust him to entertain me in his job as a writer and I'm also sure that it will be masterfully presented. However, I feel that this should be an "options" kind of rule stuck in a book I don't have to buy to play the game.

IMHO, YMMV and all that jazz.

 

[Prophet2b]

True. But it's certainly not my cup of tea. Perhaps I'm being cynical here, but I don't think that the kind of GM who would have trouble with such a thing will even bother to use those rules in the first place. I know that everything I did when I was 12 were hack-and-slash encounters... I didn't even want to bother with social interactions beyond "Do you feel lucky, punk?" until I was an experienced player/DM.

Wait, wait, wait... I don't understand your logic. You seem to be saying, "It's obviously better, but any DM worth his salt will have done it anyway, so why put it in the rules?" That's like saying, "Initiative is obviously a good way to start encounters, so any DM worth his salt will start encounters that way - so why put it in the rules?" If it's better... put it in the rules! If someone doesn't like it, you're right - they'll change it. But why on earth would you leave it out of the rules if you thought it was the better way to go? Because there will still be people who benefit from it.

I'm an examble of a (somewhat) inexperienced DM (only been DMing for roughly 1.5-2 years now), and I have never heard of treating social interaction as in encounter in this way. I love the social interaction aspect of D&D. There is always far more role playing and political intrigue and so forth in my games. But I just never thought of this...

So, count me as one who is glad this is making the rulebook!

 

[TerraDave]

They are saying what I (and I guess many others) want to hear. YES, tell me how to build all kinds of cool encounters (and yes your right, 3ed didn't really tell me). And, YES, include social encounters (and yes, a weak spot of 3ed).

But when the details come out, it could just be: NO, NO, NO.

 

[Umbran]

So what's the reason to quantify these types of encounters with rules?

For one thing, some folks want to play a character that is notably better or worse at social interactions than the player is. If there are no rules for social interaction, then the player cannot build to be good or bad, specifically.

In addition, having some rules makes social interaction scenes a bit more workable when dealing with a group of players who don't know each other well - many of the ways DMs use to resolve such things without rules don't work well when they don't know the players.

And, lastly, giving it a basis in the core rules means that they can also integrate interactions between game sub-systems (say, social-combat interactions like feinting and intimidation, or social-magic interactions with spells that work based on performance, or what have you) in a way that is far more seamless and simpler to balance.

 

[buzz]

Nice to see 4e catching up with current design in this arena.

 

[Mallus]

I like the implication that the new social combat rules will be optional, or at least additional. They'll be for people who want to do something other than then 'just talk it out'. They won't be the only system for resolving social encounters.

 

[Villanelle]

I like the implication that the new social combat rules will be optional, or at least additional. They'll be for people who want to do something other than then 'just talk it out'. They won't be the only system for resolving social encounters.

That's what I was just thinking. If it's clunky let's just not use it.

 

[Mallus]

If it's clunky let's just not use it.

That my approach to RPG rules in general!